Why would Dr. McQueary or Dranov have any mandated reporting duties in this situation?
All licensed healthcare professionals are mandated reporters in PA.
Being one myself, I am aware. However, were they affiliated with Penn State? Did the child come before them in their professional activities?
If neither was true, they would not have mandated reporting requirements in this matter.
Will direct you to the end of Rominger’s cross examination of Dr. Dranov, where Dranov is explaining that even when pressed, MM never reported witnessing a sexual act.
Rominger to Dranov: “You’re a mandatory reporter?”
Dranov to Rominger: “Yes.”
^^ Page 16, Line 12 ^^
So what? That’s accurate. He is a mandated reporter. It does not mean he is mandated to report any and all abuse he suspects. Only that regarding a child coming before him in his professional capacity (including any institution he is professionally affiliated with).
Wow, that is eye opening stuff. If only the jury heard Dr. Dranov’s testimony, surely they would find Sandusky not guilty of sexually assaulting a boy based on McQuery’s testimony.
Oh, wait. They did. And they still convicted.
I’ll cite to this again, because the prior 3 times were apparently not enough for you.
""Q: Without getting into any graphic detail, what did Mr. McQueary tell you he had seen and where?
Mr. Paterno: Well, he had seen a person, an older — not an older, but a mature person who was fondling, whatever you might call it — I’m not sure what the term would be — a young boy.
Q: Did he identify who that older person was?
Mr. Paterno: Yes, a man by the name of Jerry Sandusky who had been one of our coaches, was not at the time.
Q: You’re saying that at the time this incident was reported to you, Sandusky was no longer a coach?
Mr. Paterno: No, he had retired voluntarily. I’m not sure exactly the year, but I think it was either ‘98 or ‘99.
Q: I think you used the term fondling. Is that the term that you used?
Mr. Paterno: Well, I don’t know what you would call it. Obviously, he was doing something with the youngster.
It was a sexual nature. I’m not sure exactly what it was.
I didn’t push Mike to describe exactly what it was because he was very upset. Obviously, I was in a little bit of a dilemma since Mr. Sandusky was not working for me anymore.
So I told — I didn’t go any further than that except I knew Mike was upset and I knew some kind of inappropriate action was being taken by Jerry Sandusky with a youngster.."
Then, Paterno goes onto testify:
"Q: To whom or with whom did you share the information that McQueary had given you?
Mr. Paterno: I talked to my immediate boss, our athletic director.
Q: What is that person’s name?
Mr. Paterno: Tim Curley.
Q: How did you contact Mr. Curley?
Mr. Paterno: I believe I did it by phone. As I recall, I called him and I said, hey, we got a problem, and I explained the problem to him.
Q: Was the information that you passed along substantially the same information that Mr. McQueary had given you?
Mr. Paterno: Yes.
Now, I suppose you could go with the old “well, they didn’t prove anal rape, so there must not have been sexual assault” like SA does, but, really, do you want to make that your argument too?
Au contraire, mon dipstick. I haven’t said any such thing. Either you’re deliberately lying or you’re in sore need of a remedial course in reading comprehension.
Hentor, with you being a licensed health care professional, I’ll take your word for it that Dr. Dranov and Dr. McQueary were not mandated reporters in this instance.
However, would you agree that these two highly skilled health care professionals (who typically assume mandated reporting responsibilities) could offer MM extremely highly qualified guidance and direction in the handling of suspected child sexual abuse?
Hamlet, just to clarify my position on a few items:
- Yes, I do believe with 95% certainty that Jerry Sandusky is a pedophile and a disease to society.
- I am not trying to claim that I know what MM did or didn’t see, but rather to point out the many reasons to be skeptical about his wide-ranging inconsistencies and questionable credibility. To me, MM is the one constant source of chaos in this never-ending tragic mess.
- Joe Paterno did not cover-up the allegations against MM. In fact, he acted in character by taking MM’s report seriously, fulfilling his legal responsibility of reporting up the chain of command, then going a step further by commissioning the head of PS police, and finally following up with MM several times in the following months to make sure the he felt the situation was handled the right way.
- Do I believe JVP was unfairly scapegoated? Absolutely.
- Do I think it’s time to move on? No way. Not a fraction of justice has been served for the victims, not a fraction of the true evil-doers have been called to justice, I get the sense that there are a lot of forces working hard to keep a lid on things but the whole thing is eventually going to blow open on a scale that morphs the last 10 months.
No one has forced you to do anything. You choose to post here, and you choose the words you use. Grow a pair and accept some personal responsibility for it.
Did you really interpret that to mean I was forced as if by a twisted arm or gun to my head?
Or are you just being silly?
Certainly I chose the method, but I was forced to come up with something graphic which left little doubt as to the various points that needed to be made. This was made necessary by their plainly stated refusal to look closely at the unlikely mechanics and physics which would have had to come into play in the scenario they were so certain of, as demonstrated by their claims to me at the time that only a pedophilic pervert would want to look closely at the details (again, i.e., evidence) in the first place.
So yes, I chose the vehicle but I was forced to do so by the hysterical, wilful and determined stupidity of the people I was dealing with at the time. If they had been people of a higher calibre or greater intelligence that vehicle wouldn’t have been necessary.
But they weren’t and it was.
I was exaggerating, simply because about 6 pages ago I asked you why it mattered one whit whether or not anal rape was proven beyond a reasonable doubt when sexual assault was proven. And you, as you have done consistently throughout this thread, ignored it. You simply didn’t respond, opting instead to stick your fingers in your ears and sing “I’m a winner!!!” to yourself over and over. None of which surprised me in the least.
Nothing you do here is forced; nothing is made necessary by the arguments against you. When you say that it is, it serves only as an attempt to weasel out of any responsibility for the things you choose to say.
He did the minimum he was required and no more. That’s not good enough for me, nor should it be good enough for anyone else with a shred of morality. I worry for all the victims who came after 1998, when Paterno and company first knew of some indiscretions, and even more for the victims who came after McQuery reported what happened in the shower. Those were kids who could have been protected, SHOULD have been protected, but Penn State, and Paterno, were too concerned about their football program to take an extra step and make sure this stopped. They had the power to stop a monster and did next to nothing. So, in a word, fuck them.
As to a cover up, I think I’ll wait until the civil cases and the perjury trials come around.
Who are these “true evil doers”? Was there a pedophile ring? Were there payoffs? Or are you intimating that this whole thing was a set up and Paterno and Penn State are blameless victims?
You weren’t exaggerating, you were lying; which I suspect you’re doing even now in order to cover your mendacity to NLP.
In regard to the post I ignored, how many times am I supposed to answer the same question? I’ve answered it multiple times already and in considerable detail. I recall answering it several times to Bryan Ekers alone.
Do a little research if you can’t be arsed to keep up with the thread’s progress.
I’ve boasted many times of the perfect cromulence of the paper towel tube test and I do so again here. Your attempt to make it seem I’m trying to avoid responsibility for it is a fail just like most of your arguments in this thread.
Hamlet, I’ll agree to disagree with you about the whole “he did the minimum” criticism.
- Why do the overwhelming majority of child sexual abuse cases go undetected? Because it almost requires a minor miracle to get anyone to do “the bare minimum.” Either out of denial, disbelief, cowardice or self-preservation, the “bare minimum” is a huge breakthrough in putting an end to child sexual abuse.
- If your goal is to protect the brand against unsightly stains, you tell Mike McQueary that if he knows what’s good for him, he’ll never mention it ever again (like the University of Michigan actually did when a whistleblower was driven to tears for having the nerve to file a report about a pedophile studying to be a pediatrician). Instead, the reports traveled from MM to JM & JD, then JVP who commissioned TC & GS who reported to Spanier, Jack Raykovitz and the Second Mile Foundation. Helluva gameplan to protect the old football brand!
- Ehhhh, waste of time. You’ll judge as you’ll judge as you’ll judge… enjoy.
Quickly.
Real evil-doers. Names:
Tom Corbett.
Leroy Zimmerman.
Central Mountain HS principal, football coach & guidance counselor.
Jack Raykovitz.
Katherine Genovese.
John Seasock.
And, yes, there could be a ring.
A perfectly cromulent (whatever that means) test where you chose the method but were forced to be graphic without avoiding responsibility.
Gotcha.
Folks, he still insists that anal rape was physically impossible. Despite many people actually performing and passing the paper towel tube test (he just says these folks are lying), and despite numerous videos, freely available on the internet, of a tall man having sex with a short person in the exact same position as reported by McQueary.
He really still believes this stuff!
I don’t think SA is a pedophile or even a sympathizer- I just think he’s a dinosaur relic of 50s thinking- he doesn’t really understand the act of human sexual intercourse, he doesn’t really want to understand it, and he thinks things were better back in the old days when people just didn’t talk about it much. And this is how he excuses Paterno- that he was an old man who couldn’t imagine that such perversion might have taken place, so he can’t be judged by modern societal mores.
This is the stuff of Straight Dope Legend. I just feel priveliged to have participated, even just a tiny bit.
That’s a lie, I never maid any such accusations.
Sweet fuck, please quit using Simpsons references in your vile posts. You are ruining the word cromulent for the rest of us, asshole.